2009/3/2 Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be>:

> All right, I understand. The question now is: are you sure it is in
> "your" interest to be that selfish. It is not a moral question: can
> you be coherent, take the full piece of botter "dead is not big deal"
> of the midazolam argument, and keep that sort of selfishness.
> Do you prefer to live in a country 1 where "self-torture" is allowed
> but only when the decision is made before the duplication (and yes you
> could be the victim indeed), or in a country 2 where "self-torture" is
> allowed after the duplication. It seems to me that your midazolam-
> argument (I re-quote below(*)) should in fine relativize the very
> notion of selfishness.
> I think it is preferable to live in the first country: yes I could be
> the victim, but I can remember my consent. In the second type of
> country, I could even more so be the tortured one ... eventually; and
> without my consent. OK?

Living in the first country is equivalent to allowing a contract where
you agree to a gain today at the cost of suffering tomorrow, like
selling your soul to the devil.

Stathis Papaioannou

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to